McMillin v. Foster City et al

Filing 41

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION PURSUANT TO RULE 41(b) re 39 MOTION to Dismiss ACTION AND REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT PER FED R. CIV. PROC. 41(b) AND 58(d) filed by Foster City, Pierre Morrison, Douglas Nix, 40 Order, 38 Order on Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Alsup on September 24, 2012. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/24/2012)

1
2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
8

TOM McMILLIN,

9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

No. C 11-03201 WHA

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION
PURSUANT TO RULE 41(b)

12

FOSTER CITY, FOSTER CITY POLICE
DEPARTMENT, DOUGLAS NIX,
PIERRE MORRISON, and DOES 1–40,

13

Defendants.
/

14
15

All claims in this Section 1983 action were dismissed in July on grounds of preclusion,

16

statute of limitations, failure to state a claim, and lack of ripeness (Dkt. No. 38). Plaintiff, who is

17

represented by counsel, was given fourteen days to move for leave to file an amended complaint.

18

After that deadline passed without any actions by plaintiff, defendants moved to dismiss the

19

action for failure to comply with the Court’s order and entry of judgment (Dkt. No. 39). This

20

Court then issued an order to show cause for failure to comply with the prior order’s deadline

21

(Dkt. No. 40).

22

Plaintiff has now failed to respond to the order to show cause and oppose defendants’

23

motion to dismiss under Rule 41(b). Therefore, this action is dismissed pursuant to Rule 41(b)

24

for failure to comply with the Court’s order and failure to prosecute.

25
26

IT IS SO ORDERED.

27
28

Dated: September 24, 2012.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE